CaltechAUTHORS
  A Caltech Library Service

Unanimous Consent Agreements: Going along in the Senate

Krehbiel, Keith (1985) Unanimous Consent Agreements: Going along in the Senate. Social Science Working Paper, 568. California Institute of Technology , Pasadena, CA. (Unpublished) http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20170915-153916911

[img] PDF (sswp 568 - May 1985) - Submitted Version
See Usage Policy.

334Kb

Use this Persistent URL to link to this item: http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20170915-153916911

Abstract

In recent decades the U. S. Senate has made increasing use of complex unanimous consent agreements (UCAs) to set a time for a final vote on legislation (thereby precluding filibusters) and to specify, for example, who may offer what amendments. Because of the numerous dilatory tactics permitted in the absence of a UCA, controversial legislation is typically doomed unless a prior agreement has been reached. Thus the norm of consent to unanimous consent requests (UCRs) is puzzling. This paper addresses the puzzle with a decision-theoretic model of consent which yields what appears to be a rather stringent condition for objection to a UCR. Two actual cases of objection are analyzed and seem quite consistent with comparative statics results derived from the model. A concluding discussion considers UCAs as instances of endogenously chosen institutions which provide Senate leaders with opportunities to induce cooperative behavior.


Item Type:Report or Paper (Working Paper)
Related URLs:
URLURL TypeDescription
http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20171113-153304811Related ItemPublished Version
Additional Information:I am grateful to Tom Gilligan and Doug Rivers for helpful conversations and comments, and to Walter Oleszek for bringing the cases to my attention. Published as Krehbiel, Keith. "Unanimous consent agreements: Going along in the Senate." The Journal of Politics 48.3 (1986): 541-564.
Group:Social Science Working Papers
Subject Keywords:Senators, Upper houses, United States Senate, Expected utility, Political science, Temptation, Wheat, Presidential debates, Congressional voting, Political debate
Record Number:CaltechAUTHORS:20170915-153916911
Persistent URL:http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20170915-153916911
Usage Policy:No commercial reproduction, distribution, display or performance rights in this work are provided.
ID Code:81502
Collection:CaltechAUTHORS
Deposited By: Jacquelyn Bussone
Deposited On:19 Sep 2017 21:49
Last Modified:15 Nov 2017 23:57

Repository Staff Only: item control page